Videoscopic assisted retroperitoneal debridement in infected necrotizing pancreatitis

Treatment options for acute pancreatitis

This Review covers the latest developments in the treatment of acute pancreatitis. The Atlanta Classification of acute pancreatitis has been revised, proposing several new terms and abandoning some of the old and confusing terminology. The 2012 Revised Atlanta Classification and the determinant-based classification aim to universally define the different local and systemic complications and predict outcome. The most important differences between these classifications are discussed. Several promising treatment options for the early management of acute pancreatitis have been tested, including the use of enteral nutrition and antibiotics as well as novel therapies such as haemofiltration and protease inhibitors. The results are summarized and the quality of evidence is discussed. Finally, new developments in the management of patients with infected pancreatic necrosis are addressed, including the use of the 'step-up approach' and results of minimally invasive necrosectomy.

Dual-modality drainage of infected and symptomatic walled-off pancreatic necrosis: long-term clinical outcomes

BACKGROUND

Management options for symptomatic and infected walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN) have evolved over the past decade from open surgical necrosectomy to more minimally invasive approaches. We reported the use of a combined percutaneous and endoscopic approach (dual modality drainage [DMD]) for the treatment of symptomatic and infected WOPN, with good short-term outcomes in a small cohort of patients.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the long-term outcomes of 117 patients with symptomatic and infected WOPN treated by DMD.

DESIGN

Review of a prospective, internal review board-approved database.

SETTING

Single, North American, tertiary-care center.

PATIENTS

All patients with symptomatic and infected WOPN treated by DMD at our institution between 2007 and 2012.

INTERVENTION

DMD of symptomatic and infected WOPN.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Disease-related mortality, pancreaticocutaneous fistula formation, need for early and late surgical intervention, procedure-related adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 117 patients underwent DMD for symptomatic and infected WOPN. A total of 103 have completed treatment, with all percutaneous drains removed. Ten patients are still undergoing treatment, and 4 patients died with percutaneous drains in place (3.4% disease-related mortality). For the patients completing therapy, the median duration of follow-up was 749.5 days. No patients required surgical necrosectomy or surgical treatment of DMD-related adverse events; 3 patients required late surgery for pain (n = 2) and gastric outlet obstruction (n = 1). There were no procedure-related deaths. In patients who have completed treatment, percutaneous drains have been removed in 100%; no patients have developed pancreaticocutaneous fistulas.

LIMITATIONS

Single-center design, lack of a comparison group.

CONCLUSION

DMD for symptomatic and infected WOPN results in favorable clinical outcomes; complete avoidance of pancreaticocutaneous fistulae, surgical necrosectomy, and major procedure-related adverse events, while maintaining single-digit disease-related mortality.

Minimally invasive procedures in severe acute pancreatitis treatment - assessment of benefits and possibilities of use

Introduction

Acute pancreatitis (AP) consists of an extremely varied complex of pathological symptoms and clinical conditions, ranging from mild gastric complaints to multi-organ failure resulting in death.

Aim

To present the authors’ own experience regarding surgical treatment for pancreatic necrosis complicated by infection using different methods, including classic and laparoscopic methods as well as those combined with percutaneous techniques.

Material and methods

In the period 2007–2010, 34 patients with the diagnosis of severe AP were treated at the Department of General, Gastroenterological and Oncological Surgery, Collegium Medicum, Nicolaus Copernicus University. In 7 patients classic necrosectomy with repeated peritoneal flushing was performed (type 1), in 5 patients laparotomy with active drainage (type 2), in 12 video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement (type 3), and in 10 only percutaneous drainage methods (type 4).

Results

Total duration of hospitalisation was from 10 to 192 days. The highest death rate was observed for type 1 procedures. Significant differences with regard to the absolute number of postoperative complications between different groups were not observed; however, their quality varied. Classic methods were used in patients whose general and local condition was more severe.

Conclusions

When AP and its complications are diagnosed, a suitable method of surgical treatment has to be selected extremely precisely and in an individualised way. Minimally invasive methods used in selected patients provide better outcomes and higher safety superseding classic, open techniques of surgical treatment.

Acute inflammatory surgical disease

Infectious and inflammatory diseases comprise some of the most common gastrointestinal disorders resulting in hospitalization in the United States. Accordingly, they occupy a significant proportion of the workload of the acute care surgeon. This article discusses the diagnosis, management, and treatment of appendicitis, acute cholecystitis/cholangitis, acute pancreatitis, diverticulitis, and Clostridium difficile colitis.

Transluminal endoscopic step-up approach versus minimally invasive surgical step-up approach in patients with infected necrotising pancreatitis (TENSION trial): design and rationale of a randomised controlled multicenter trial [ISRCTN09186711]

Background

Infected necrotising pancreatitis is a potentially lethal disease that nearly always requires intervention. Traditionally, primary open necrosectomy has been the treatment of choice. In recent years, the surgical step-up approach, consisting of percutaneous catheter drainage followed, if necessary, by (minimally invasive) surgical necrosectomy has become the standard of care. A promising minimally invasive alternative is the endoscopic transluminal step-up approach. This approach consists of endoscopic transluminal drainage followed, if necessary, by endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy. We hypothesise that the less invasive endoscopic step-up approach is superior to the surgical step-up approach in terms of clinical and economic outcomes.

Methods/Design

The TENSION trial is a randomised controlled, parallel-group superiority multicenter trial. Patients with (suspected) infected necrotising pancreatitis with an indication for intervention and in whom both treatment modalities are deemed possible, will be randomised to either an endoscopic transluminal or a surgical step-up approach. During a 4 year study period, 98 patients will be enrolled from 24 hospitals of the Dutch Pancreatitis Study Group. The primary endpoint is a composite of death and major complications within 6 months following randomisation. Secondary endpoints include complications such as pancreaticocutaneous fistula, exocrine or endocrine pancreatic insufficiency, need for additional radiological, endoscopic or surgical intervention, the need for necrosectomy after drainage, the number of (re-)interventions, quality of life, and total direct and indirect costs.

Discussion

The TENSION trial will answer the question whether an endoscopic step-up approach reduces the combined primary endpoint of death and major complications, as well as hospital stay and related costs compared with a surgical step-up approach in patients with infected necrotising pancreatitis.

Minimally invasive necrosectomy versus conventional surgery in the treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis: a systematic review and a meta-analysis of comparative studies

AIM

The purpose of this meta-analysis and systematic review is to compare minimally invasive necrosectomy (MIN) versus open necrosectomy (ON) surgery for infected necrosis of acute pancreatitis.

METHODS

One randomized controlled trial and 3 clinical controlled trials were selected, with a total of 336 patients (215 patients who underwent MIN and 121 patients underwent ON) included after searching in the following databases: Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, BioMed Central, Science Citation Index (from inception to August 2011), Greynet, SIGLE (System for Information on Grey Literature in Europe), National Technological Information Service, British Library Integrated catalogue, and the Current Controlled Trials. Statistical analysis is performed using the odds ratio (OR) and weighted mean difference with 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

After the analysis of the data amenable to polling, significant advantages were found in favor of the MIN in terms of: incidence of multiple organ failure (OR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.06-0.39) (P < 0.0001), incisional hernias (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.06-0.90) (P = 0.03), new-onset diabetes (OR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.12-0.88) (P = 0.03), and for the use of pancreatic enzymes (OR, 0.005; 95% CI, 0.04-0.57) (P = 0.005). No differences were found in terms of mortality rate (OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.18-1.05) (P = 0.06), multiple systemic complications (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.01-8.60) (P = 0.51), surgical reintervention for further necrosectomy (OR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.00-3.07) (P = 0.19), intra-abdominal bleeding (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.41-1.50) (P = 0.46), enterocutaneous fistula or perforation of visceral organs (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.27-1.00) (P = 0.05), pancreatic fistula (OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.30-1.46) (P = 0.30), and surgical reintervention for postoperative complications (OR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.23-1.08) (P = 0.08).

CONCLUSIONS

The lack of comparative studies and high heterogeneity of the data present in the literature did not permit to draw a definitive conclusion on this topic. The results of the present meta-analysis might be helpful to design future high-powered randomized studies that compare MIN with ON for acute necrotizing pancreatitis.

Surgical treatment of acute pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Acute pancreatitis remains an unpredictable, potentially lethal disease with significant morbidity and mortality rates. New insights in the pathophysiology of acute pancreatitis have changed management concepts. In the first phase, characterized by a systemic inflammatory response syndrome, organ failure, not related to infection but rather to severe inflammation, dominates the focus of treatment. In the second phase, secondary infectious complications largely determine the clinical outcome. As infection is associated with increased mortality in acute pancreatitis, numerous prophylactic strategies have been explored in the past two decades.

PURPOSE

This review describes the strategies that have been developed to lower the infection rate, in an attempt to lower mortality. Antibiotic prophylaxis has been the subject of many RCT's without showing convincing evidence of their efficacy. Probiotics, although theoretically capable of lowering the rate of infection, also had no effect on infectious complications, and consequently, no effective strategy to lower the rate of infectious complications is currently available. In the second part of this review, new approaches for necrosectomy that have been designed by different centers around the world are discussed. All the interventional techniques have in common their aim to lower the invasive character, hypothesizing that lowering the surgical trauma will improve survival and lower complication rates. Recent advances include postponing intervention as a strategy to facilitate necrosectomy and improve prognosis and the "step-up approach" in case of infected necrosis. The step-up approach includes percutaneous catheter drainage as the first step, to be followed by necrosectomy, either through a minimally invasive approach or by open necrosectomy, as the next step.

CONCLUSIONS

All attempts to develop treatment strategies to lower the infection rate in acute pancreatitis have failed. Accumulating evidence is emerging to show that the combination of centralization, the use of catheter drainage as the first step of invasive treatment, and the development of minimally invasive techniques, improve the outlook for patients with infected necrosis. It is uncertain at this point in time as to which of the three effects is dominant in the improvement of prognosis.

Surgical treatment of acute pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Acute pancreatitis remains an unpredictable, potentially lethal disease with significant morbidity and mortality rates. New insights in the pathophysiology of acute pancreatitis have changed management concepts. In the first phase, characterized by a systemic inflammatory response syndrome, organ failure, not related to infection but rather to severe inflammation, dominates the focus of treatment. In the second phase, secondary infectious complications largely determine the clinical outcome. As infection is associated with increased mortality in acute pancreatitis, numerous prophylactic strategies have been explored in the past two decades.

PURPOSE

This review describes the strategies that have been developed to lower the infection rate, in an attempt to lower mortality. Antibiotic prophylaxis has been the subject of many RCT's without showing convincing evidence of their efficacy. Probiotics, although theoretically capable of lowering the rate of infection, also had no effect on infectious complications, and consequently, no effective strategy to lower the rate of infectious complications is currently available. In the second part of this review, new approaches for necrosectomy that have been designed by different centers around the world are discussed. All the interventional techniques have in common their aim to lower the invasive character, hypothesizing that lowering the surgical trauma will improve survival and lower complication rates. Recent advances include postponing intervention as a strategy to facilitate necrosectomy and improve prognosis and the "step-up approach" in case of infected necrosis. The step-up approach includes percutaneous catheter drainage as the first step, to be followed by necrosectomy, either through a minimally invasive approach or by open necrosectomy, as the next step.

CONCLUSIONS

All attempts to develop treatment strategies to lower the infection rate in acute pancreatitis have failed. Accumulating evidence is emerging to show that the combination of centralization, the use of catheter drainage as the first step of invasive treatment, and the development of minimally invasive techniques, improve the outlook for patients with infected necrosis. It is uncertain at this point in time as to which of the three effects is dominant in the improvement of prognosis.

Interventions for necrotizing pancreatitis: an overview of current approaches

The management of necrotizing pancreatitis has undergone a paradigm shift toward minimally invasive techniques for necrosectomy, obviating the need for open necrosectomy in most cases. There is increasing evidence that minimally invasive approaches including a step-up approach that incorporates percutaneous catheter or endoscopic transluminal drainage, followed by video-assisted retroperitoneal or endoscopic debridement are associated with improved outcomes over traditional open necrosectomy for patients with infected necrosis. A recent international multidisciplinary consensus conference emphasized the superiority of minimally invasive approaches over standard surgical approaches. The success of these techniques depends on concerted efforts of a multidisciplinary team of interventional endoscopists, radiologists, intensivists and surgeons dedicated to the management of severe acute pancreatitis and its complications. This review provides an overview of minimally invasive techniques for management of necrotizing pancreatitis, including indications, timing, advantages and disadvantages.

Video-assisted Laparoscopic Débridement for Retroperitoneal Pancreatic Collections: A Reliable Step-up Approach

Several minimal access routes have been implemented as a step-up approach to treat infected pancreatic necrosis. We evaluate our experience with a series of consecutive patients with pancreatic collections treated with video-assisted retroperitoneal débridement (VARD). Seven patients were consecutively treated with VARD: five patients after acute necrotizing pancreatitis, one chronic pancreatitis, and one patient with perforation after endoscopic sphincterotomy. The indication for VARD was: development of sepsis, positive direct culture of the necrosis, and compartment syndrome. The procedure was performed under general anesthesia and modified lateral decubitus. There were four left, two right, and one bilateral VARD. Mean hospital stay since admission to VARD procedure was 30 days (range, 12 to 72 days). Mean operative time was 63 minutes. There were no intraoperative complications. Two patients needed a second procedure to control sepsis. Most patients had a long intensive care unit (ICU) stay with 6.1 days (range, 2 to 22 days) mean postoperative ICU stay. One patient had a hypernatremia as a consequence of saline lavage and three patients presented pancreatic fistula that were managed with conservative treatment. There was no mortality. VARD approach is a recommended step-up approach to treat infected pancreatic necrosis, and its indication may be extended to treat other retroperitoneal collections.

Treatment of necrotizing pancreatitis

Acute pancreatitis is a common and potentially lethal disease. It is associated with significant morbidity and consumes enormous health care resources. Over the last 2 decades, the treatment of acute pancreatitis has undergone fundamental changes based on new conceptual insights and evidence from clinical studies. The majority of patients with necrotizing pancreatitis have sterile necrosis, which can be successfully treated conservatively. Emphasis of conservative treatment is on supportive measures and prevention of infection of necrosis and other complications. Patients with infected necrosis generally need to undergo an intervention, which has shifted from primary open necrosectomy in an early disease stage to a step-up approach, starting with catheter drainage if needed, followed by minimally invasive surgical or endoscopic necrosectomy once peripancreatic collections have sufficiently demarcated. This review provides an overview of current standards for conservative and invasive treatment of necrotizing pancreatitis.

The Evolving Management of Infected Pancreatic Necrosis

Management of infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) has for decades been based on early operative débridement. This approach is associated with mortality rates as high as 58 per cent. Recently, the care of these patients has evolved and emphasizes delayed operation and early intervention with percutaneous drainage. In 2002, we began to incorporate these new principles for the treatment of IPN and herein characterize the recent UCLA experience with management of IPN. A retrospective review of patients with IPN treated at UCLA between 2002 and 2011 was conducted. Mean patient age was 53.4 years. Mean Ranson's score was 3.3 ± 2.3 and average number of concurrent comorbidities 3.2 ± 2.5. All patients were treated with intravenous antibiotics. Thirteen of 18 patients (72.2%) had percutaneous drainage catheters placed (mean 1.1 drains per patient). Two patients were treated with percutaneous drainage alone. Sixteen of 18 (88.9%) eventually underwent surgical débridement. Of the operative patients, mean time from diagnosis to surgery was 28.4 days. The mortality in this group was 16.7 per cent. In conclusion, antibiotics and percutaneous drainage is an acceptable and possibly preferable initial therapeutic strategy for patients with IPN. Delayed operation and early intervention with percutaneous drainage appears to improve mortality for these patients.

The evolving management of infected pancreatic necrosis

Management of infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) has for decades been based on early operative débridement. This approach is associated with mortality rates as high as 58 per cent. Recently, the care of these patients has evolved and emphasizes delayed operation and early intervention with percutaneous drainage. In 2002, we began to incorporate these new principles for the treatment of IPN and herein characterize the recent UCLA experience with management of IPN. A retrospective review of patients with IPN treated at UCLA between 2002 and 2011 was conducted. Mean patient age was 53.4 years. Mean Ranson's score was 3.3±2.3 and average number of concurrent comorbidities 3.2±2.5. All patients were treated with intravenous antibiotics. Thirteen of 18 patients (72.2%) had percutaneous drainage catheters placed (mean 1.1 drains per patient). Two patients were treated with percutaneous drainage alone. Sixteen of 18 (88.9%) eventually underwent surgical débridement. Of the operative patients, mean time from diagnosis to surgery was 28.4 days. The mortality in this group was 16.7 per cent. In conclusion, antibiotics and percutaneous drainage is an acceptable and possibly preferable initial therapeutic strategy for patients with IPN. Delayed operation and early intervention with percutaneous drainage appears to improve mortality for these patients.

Management of infected pancreatic necrosis using retroperitoneal necrosectomy with flexible endoscope: 10 years of experience

BACKGROUND

This study was designed to provide our experience in the management of infected and drained pancreatic necrosis using the retroperitoneal approach.

METHODS

This was a prospective observational study in a tertiary care university hospital. Thirty-two patients with confirmed infected pancreatic necrosis were studied. Superficial necrosectomy was performed with lavage and aspiration of debris. This was achieved though a retroperitoneal approach of the pancreatic area and under the direct vision of a flexible endoscope. The follow-up procedure using retroperitoneal endoscopy did not require taking the patient to the operating room. The main outcome measures were infection control, morbidity, and mortality related to technique, reintervention, and long-term follow-up.

RESULTS

No significant morbidity or mortality related to the technique was observed in all of the patients with infected pancreatic necrosis treated with this retroperitoneal approach compared with published data using other approaches. Reinterventions were not required and patients are currently asymptomatic.

CONCLUSIONS

Retroperitoneal access of the pancreatic area is a good approach for drainage and debridement of infected pancreatic necrosis. Translumbar retroperitoneal endoscopy allows exploration under direct visual guidance avoiding open transabdominal reintervention and the risk of contamination of the abdominal cavity. This technique does not increase morbidity and mortality, can be performed at the patients' bedside as many times as necessary, and has advantages over other retroperitoneal approaches.

A case of video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement in a patient with HELLP syndrome

Hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes, low platelet count (HELLP) syndrome describes a cohort of disease processes that may have devastating consequences for the peripartum patient. Although the hemopoetic and hepatic systems are classically involved, we illustrate a case of walled-off pancreatic necrosis occurring in a woman with HELLP syndrome. Initially managed with resuscitation, steroids, and plasmapheresis, the patient developed necrotizing pancreatitis that overtime became walled-off. Despite attempts at percutaneous drainage, the patient ultimately had a video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement. As there are no descriptions in the literature of walled-off pancreatic necrosis stemming from HELLP syndrome, this case provides a new avenue from which to study the pathophysiology and provides a management strategy for this problem.

Soluble triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells in severe acute pancreatitis: a biological marker of infected necrosis

PURPOSE

The diagnosis and treatment of secondary infection of pancreatic necrotic tissue remain a major challenge. The level of soluble triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells (sTREM-1) in fine needle aspiration (FNA) fluid may be a good marker of infected necrosis.

METHODS

Patients with a clinical suspicion of secondary infection of necrotic tissue were enrolled. The serum levels of C-reactive protein, amylase, procalcitonin (PCT), and sTREM-1 and the fluid levels of sTREM-1, PCT, interleukin-6 (IL-6), tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), and amylase were examined. When infected necrosis was defined, the first step was percutaneous or endoscopic drainage. If there was no improvement after 72 h, an open necrosectomy was performed.

RESULTS

In 30 patients with suspected infection, 18 patients were diagnosed as having secondary infection of necrotic tissue. The levels of sTREM-1 and PCT in FNA fluid were found to have the closest correlation with the diagnosis of infected necrosis [sTREM-1: area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) 0.972; 95% confidence interval (95%CI) 0.837-1.000; PCT: AUC 0.903; 95%CI 0.670-0.990, P > 0.05]. A fluid sTREM-1 cutoff value of 285.6 pg/ml had a sensitivity of 94.4% and a specificity of 91.7%. In a multiple logistic regression analysis, an sTREM-1 level of more than 285 pg/ml and a PCT level of more than 2.0 ng/ml in FNA fluid were independent predictors of infected necrosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The fluid level of sTREM-1 will help in the rapid and accurate diagnosis of secondary infection of necrotic tissue in patients with severe acute pancreatitis (SAP).

Acute pancreatitis during pregnancy

Acute pancreatitis in pregnancy is a rare condition estimated to occur in 1 per 1000 to 1 per 12,000 pregnancies. The most frequent etiology in pregnancy is biliary, followed by hyperlipidemia and/or alcohol abuse. Abdominal ultrasound and endoscopic ultrasound are ideal imaging techniques for diagnosing disease because they have no radiation risk. Computed tomography, magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography should be used with caution. Treatment could be conservative or surgical, and standard algorithms are slightly modified in pregnant women. In the last decades the outcome of acute pancreatitis in pregnancy is much better, and perinatal mortality is less than 5%.

A conservative and minimally invasive approach to necrotizing pancreatitis improves outcome

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Treatment of patients with necrotizing pancreatitis has become more conservative and less invasive, but there are few data from prospective studies to support the efficacy of this change. We performed a prospective multicenter study of treatment outcomes among patients with necrotizing pancreatitis.

METHODS

We collected data from 639 consecutive patients with necrotizing pancreatitis, from 2004 to 2008, treated at 21 Dutch hospitals. Data were analyzed for disease severity, interventions (radiologic, endoscopic, surgical), and outcome.

RESULTS

Overall mortality was 15% (n=93). Organ failure occurred in 240 patients (38%), with 35% mortality. Treatment was conservative in 397 patients (62%), with 7% mortality. An intervention was performed in 242 patients (38%), with 27% mortality; this included early emergency laparotomy in 32 patients (5%), with 78% mortality. Patients with longer times between admission and intervention had lower mortality: 0 to 14 days, 56%; 14 to 29 days, 26%; and >29 days, 15% (P<.001). A total of 208 patients (33%) received interventions for infected necrosis, with 19% mortality. Catheter drainage was most often performed as the first intervention (63% of cases), without additional necrosectomy in 35% of patients. Primary catheter drainage had fewer complications than primary necrosectomy (42% vs 64%, P=.003). Patients with pancreatic parenchymal necrosis (n=324), compared with patients with only peripancreatic necrosis (n=315), had a higher risk of organ failure (50% vs 24%, P<.001) and mortality (20% vs 9%, P<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately 62% of patients with necrotizing pancreatitis can be treated without an intervention and with low mortality. In patients with infected necrosis, delayed intervention and catheter drainage as first treatment improves outcome.

A comprehensive classification of invasive procedures for treating the local complications of acute pancreatitis based on visualization, route, and purpose

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The lack of a system to classify invasive procedures to treat local complications of acute pancreatitis is an obstacle to comparing interventions. This study aimed to develop and validate a comprehensive multidisciplinary classification.

METHODS

Standardized terminology was used to develop a classification of procedures based on three key components: how the lesion is visualized, the route used during the procedure, and the procedure's purpose. Gastroenterologists, radiologists, and surgeons (n = 22) from three New Zealand centers independently classified 15 published technique descriptions. Inter-rater reliability was calculated for each component. The classification's clarity, ease of use, and potential to achieve its objectives were rated on a Likert scale.

RESULTS

The classification's clarity, ease of use, and potential to achieve its objectives had median scores of 4/5. Inter-rater reliability for visualization, route, and purpose components was substantial at 0.73 (95% CI 0.63-0.82), 0.79 (95% CI 0.70-0.87), and 0.64 (95% CI 0.53-0.74), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This article describes the development and validation of a comprehensive classification for the wide range of procedures used to treat the local complications of acute pancreatitis. It has substantial inter-rater reliability and high acceptability, which should enhance communication between clinicians and facilitate comparison between procedures.

Open transgastric debridement and internal drainage of symptomatic non-infected walled-off pancreatic necrosis

BACKGROUND

The best treatment options for walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN) are not well defined. A retrospective study of patients treated for WOPN with transgastric debridement and internal drainage was undertaken.

METHODS

Patients with symptomatic non-infected WOPN treated with open transgastric debridement and internal drainage were evaluated.

RESULTS

In all, 51 patients underwent surgical management of necrotizing pancreatitis during the study period. Ten patients (19%) were treated with open transgastric debridement and internal drainage for symptomatic non-infected WOPN. The median patient age was 40 years, the most common aetiology for pancreatitis was biliary, the mean American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score was 2 and the delay to surgery was 100 days. The operating time was 118 min, with a blood loss of 50cc. One patient required reoperation, three patients had morbidity and there were no mortalities. The only factor associated with post-operative morbidity was the presence of positive cultures (P < 0.05). The length of stay (LOS) after surgery was 8 days, at a median follow-up of 18 months, one patient had late complications related to the surgery and the procedure was successful in 90% of the patients.

DISCUSSION

Open transgastric debridement with internal drainage of WOPN is safe and efficacious. Patients were clinically stable (no organ failure) and had a long delay in surgical intervention (100 days). In this select group of patients, the success, morbidity and mortality is similar to all reported minimally invasive techniques.

Systematic review of percutaneous catheter drainage as primary treatment for necrotizing pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

The role of percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) in patients with (infected) necrotizing pancreatitis was evaluated.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed. Inclusion criteria were: consecutive cohort of patients with necrotizing pancreatitis undergoing PCD as primary treatment for peripancreatic collections; indication for PCD either (suspected) infected necrosis or symptomatic sterile pancreatic necrosis; and outcomes reported to include percentage of infected peripancreatic collections, need for additional surgical necrosectomy, complications and deaths. Exclusion criteria were: cohort of fewer than five patients; cohort included patients with chronic pancreatitis; selected subgroup of patients with acute pancreatitis studied, such as those with pseudocysts, pancreatic abscesses and/or exclusively sterile pancreatic necrosis; and cohort in which PCD was combined with another minimally invasive strategy and results for PCD alone not reported separately.

RESULTS

Eleven studies, including 384 patients, fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Only one study was a randomized controlled trial; most others were retrospective case series. Four studies reported on the presence of organ failure before PCD; this occurred in 67·2 per cent of 116 patients. Infected necrosis was proven in 271 (70·6 per cent) of 384 patients. No additional surgical necrosectomy was required after PCD in 214 (55·7 per cent) of 384 patients. Complications consisted mostly of internal and external pancreatic fistulas. The overall mortality rate was 17·4 per cent (67 of 384 patients). Nine of 11 studies reported mortality separately for patients with infected necrosis undergoing PCD; the mortality rate in this group was 15·4 per cent (27 of 175).

CONCLUSION

A considerable number of patients can be treated with PCD without the need for surgical necrosectomy.

Infected pancreatic necrosis: minimizing the cut

The challenge for the pancreatologist managing patients with infected pancreatic necrosis is to devise a treatment algorithm that enables recovery but at the same time limits the morbidity and mortality. The current gold standard remains open necrosectomy. Recent literature contains scattered reports of endoscopic, radiologic, laparoscopic, percutaneous and lumbotomy approaches to managing patients with this condition. This literature review addresses the role of techniques that aim to minimize the physiological insult to the patient with infected pancreatic necrosis.

Use of antibiotics in severe acute pancreatitis

Infectious complications in severe acute pancreatitis are an important problem and determine outcome in patients who survived the first inflammatory hit of the disease. Timely diagnosis of infected pancreatic necrosis is often challenging, but should not delay adequate treatment, which consists of source control and antibiotic treatment. Prophylactic antibiotics are not effective in reducing the incidence of (peri)pancreatic infection in patients with severe acute pancreatitis (or necrotizing pancreatitis). The only rational indication for antibiotics at this moment is documented infection. The spectrum of empiric antibiotics should cover both Gram-negative, Gram-positive and anaerobic microorganisms (also keeping in mind exposure to nosocomial microorganisms), and local ecology should be taken into account. Fungal infections are often present, and antifungal coverage should be considered, especially if multiple risk factors for invasive candidiasis are present. Currently, no tools are available to guide antimicrobial treatment.

A step-up approach or open necrosectomy for necrotizing pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Necrotizing pancreatitis with infected necrotic tissue is associated with a high rate of complications and death. Standard treatment is open necrosectomy. The outcome may be improved by a minimally invasive step-up approach.

METHODS

In this multicenter study, we randomly assigned 88 patients with necrotizing pancreatitis and suspected or confirmed infected necrotic tissue to undergo primary open necrosectomy or a step-up approach to treatment. The step-up approach consisted of percutaneous drainage followed, if necessary, by minimally invasive retroperitoneal necrosectomy. The primary end point was a composite of major complications (new-onset multiple-organ failure or multiple systemic complications, perforation of a visceral organ or enterocutaneous fistula, or bleeding) or death.

RESULTS

The primary end point occurred in 31 of 45 patients (69%) assigned to open necrosectomy and in 17 of 43 patients (40%) assigned to the step-up approach (risk ratio with the step-up approach, 0.57; 95% confidence interval, 0.38 to 0.87; P=0.006). Of the patients assigned to the step-up approach, 35% were treated with percutaneous drainage only. New-onset multiple-organ failure occurred less often in patients assigned to the step-up approach than in those assigned to open necrosectomy (12% vs. 40%, P=0.002). The rate of death did not differ significantly between groups (19% vs. 16%, P=0.70). Patients assigned to the step-up approach had a lower rate of incisional hernias (7% vs. 24%, P=0.03) and new-onset diabetes (16% vs. 38%, P=0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

A minimally invasive step-up approach, as compared with open necrosectomy, reduced the rate of the composite end point of major complications or death among patients with necrotizing pancreatitis and infected necrotic tissue. (Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN13975868.)

Prevention, detection, and management of infected necrosis in severe acute pancreatitis

The management of infected peripancreatic or pancreatic necrosis in patients with severe pancreatitis has changed considerably in recent years. This review discusses the recent literature on prevention, detection, and management of infected necrosis. Though antibiotics, probiotics, and enteral nutrition have been tried to prevent infected necrosis, only enteral nutrition has consistently proven to be effective. Antibiotics and probiotics have not shown a consistent beneficial effect on outcome. Enteral nutrition reduced infectious complications and mortality in severe pancreatitis, compared with parenteral nutrition. The detection of infection of pancreatic necrosis is important for clinical decision making. Fine-needle aspiration may be used to confirm suspected infection, but if its results will not change clinical decisions, it should be omitted, as it may even introduce infection. Minimally invasive surgical, radiologic, or endoscopic intervention is increasingly being applied. In the absence of level 1 evidence, local expertise dictates which type of intervention is applied.

Case-matched comparison of the retroperitoneal approach with laparotomy for necrotizing pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive necrosectomy through a retroperitoneal approach is gaining popularity for the treatment of necrotizing pancreatitis. There is, however, no substantial evidence from comparative studies in favor of this technique over laparotomy. The aim of this case-matched study was to perform the first head-to-head comparison of necrosectomy by the retroperitoneal approach with laparotomy in patients with necrotizing pancreatitis.

METHODS

Between 2001 and 2005, there were 15 of 841 consecutive acute pancreatitis patients who underwent necrosectomy by the retroperitoneal approach using a small flank incision. These patients were matched for the presence of preoperative organ failure, status of infection, timing of surgery, age, and computed tomography severity index score with 15 of 46 patients treated with necrosectomy by laparotomy and continuous postoperative lavage (CPL).

RESULTS

In addition to all matched preoperative characteristics, there were no significant differences in sex, preoperative intensive care unit (ICU) admission, preoperative ICU stay, preoperative APACHE-II scores, and preoperative multiple organ failure (MOF). Postoperative complications requiring reintervention occurred in six patients in each group (p = 1.000). Postoperative new-onset MOF occurred in 10 patients in the laparotomy/CPL group versus 2 patients in the retroperitoneal approach group (p = 0.008). Six patients died in the laparotomy/CPL group versus 1 patient in the retroperitoneal approach group (p = 0.080).

CONCLUSIONS

The less postoperative organ failure and the trend toward lower mortality may point to a benefit of the retroperitoneal approach over laparotomy. A randomized controlled design is, however, still required to answer definitively the question of which operative technique is preferably for patients with (infected) necrotizing pancreatitis.